Gromnir

"I'd have a number of mechanisms" mc said lots more than this, so it may seem unfair that we lift one phrase out, but lifted bit illustrates the big difference 'tween Gromnir pov and mc's. quest xp is simple and results in all players getting equal xp regardless o' their character build or the manner in which they choose to solve quests and play game. 1 simple and elegant solution. mc, on the other hand, would have developers apply a number o' mechanisms to attempt to achieve largely the same end. the more complex and numerous the mechanisms, the more likely they is to break.... is virtually axiomatic. Gromnir, being a dull person with limited imagination and having a preference for elegant simplicity, would much prefer the straightforward and less complicated approach, so that developers can then spend time and efforts on adding meaningful content to game. HA! Good Fun!

RuneQuest had two main ways of increasing skills: Training (yep, you could buy an extra +10% in broadsword attack if you had the time and money) Experience (you noted down the skills you'd used in the session, then did an inverted d100 check to see if you improved by a 5% increment - it got progressively tougher the higher the skill level) It worked pretty well. in a pnp game, a gm can tailor the campaign so that each player has appropriate & proportional opportunities to increase skills. in a crpg, the developer gotta account for any and all potential players. is a daunting task. typically there is gonna be far more combat encounters in a standard crpg than there will be thiefy opportunities, or diplomatic opportunities, or... whatever. so how does developer balance? is easier to write lots o' multi-tiered dialogue heavy encounters that gives opportunities to use social skillz... or throw in a few monster respawns so that players can battle and gain 1007? so why do it? why goes through effort o' trying to balance and keep proportional? quest based xp awards avoids all the nasty complications. kill 1000 monsters or kill 1 and you still get same xp points. use diplomacy or thiefy or some unforeseen approach that the developer hadn't considered? no worries, 'cause regardless o' your approach you is gonna get fixed xp for completion o' tasks. simple is not always best, but simple is often a time-saver. developer saves big 'mount o' time by using simple quest-based awards... means they gots more time to be spending on other aspects o' game. crpgs is not same as pnp. must keeps that fundamental difference in mind as one contemplates relative strengths o' different approaches. HA! Good Fun!

each class needs necessarily possess some unique attribute or ability that is unique. such a notion goes 'gainst the general concept o' freedom o' player customization. if open and free customization ain't a goal, then no big loss. have a small handful o' classes ain't necessary a bad thing, but the da approach shows the stoopidity o' some o' the class approaches. why 3 classes? da is gonna have some kinda skills customization open to all classes, so what is point o' the rogue class? d&d 4e, for all its weirdness, recognizes that previous thiefy/rogue concepts were busted... so made their 4e rogue a "striker." 4e rogue ain't simply a gimped combatant with sneak attack and extra skill points. anybody can choose skills, but what genuine distinguishes 4e classes is combat viability. da warriors does combat with weapons. da spell casters use magic. da rogue does... what? is a pointless class. has high/low intelligence, or some other factor, determines capacity of warriors or spell casters to acquire non-combat skillz, and simply flush rogue. is an antiquated rpg convention that serves no genuine purpose... save for fact that it fulfills expectations. btw, the thing that is most wrong with prestige classes and kits is balance. some 2e kits is woefully unbalanced. more kits you get and the greater the balance is likely to be busted. prestige classes is even worse 'cause o' the multi-class combinations. is impossible for any game designer to anticipate every combination o' classes and prestige classes. what is the most popular prestige classes and kits? the ultra-powerful. anecdote: when iwd2 were in early development, and it looked like it were still 2nd edition, josh offered up some possible kit choices. you peoples HATED 'em. the overwhelming negative feedback were amusing. so josh offers up some alternatives... but most o' the board clowns didn't realize that his new suggestions were tongue-in-cheek munchkin bait. fans really liked the kewl newer kits. people wants kits and prestige classes with Awesome Deathmaster Powhaz. oh, and as an aside, prestige classes, with sill prerequisites which usually ain't any kinda a burden, simply results in greater uniformity as 'posed to greater diversity. bob's red wizard is likely to look very much like tim's red wizard. freedom o' customization creates its own problems, so often hard defined and limited classes is an easier and often more elegant approach. that being said, schizophrenic developers often tries to achieve freedom and multiple, specialized and unique classes... which leads to a whole host o' problems. HA! Good Fun!

pain in the arse to set up. it did not add enough for me to get excited about it. taks There's a new version out called easytutu thats really easy to set up, you just choose where you have BG2 and BG1 and where you want to intall tutu and it does the rest. Also you can uninstall BG1 after you've installed Tutu. IMO the higher resolutions alone are worth it, but getting highlight, better weapon proficiences and with mods ammo and potion cases and gem bags it really makes BG1 a better experience. Also there's a mod called Sword Coast Stratagems that makes the game a bit more challenging, but unlike Tactics it doesn't cheat, it's just scripting and moving some encounters around. It's almost like a new game. sidenote: Gromnir tried sword coast strategems a while back and had problems... probably dowloaded into wrong file or something. still have the file, but not loaded and the readme is kinda wonky. you know if this thing should be extracted to tutu file or override? might try bg in future. should probably simply download new version o' strategems... *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

the great thing 'bout a crpg over a pnp rpg is that all the numbers crunching in a crpg takes place instantaneous. bizarre flanking rules and grapples and seemingly endless modifiers can be dealt with by a game engine in the fraction o' a second. what becomes tedious and unwieldy in a pnp rpg can go largely unnoticed in a crpg. am doubting that bio goes for any sorta genuine complexity. their general design philosophy embraces a notion o' maximized accessibility. a highly complex combat system, even if the rulez is being accounted for behind the scenes, is probably considered too hardcore for bio. keep rules relative simple to understand is what Gromnir foresees. that being said, simple & streamlined is not a bad thing. rulez o' chess is very simple, but clearly there is great opportunity for complex strategy in such a game. am expecting da to be broken. pretty much any new rpg rule system is broken when first released. d&d 3e got considerable play-testing 'fore release and it managed to have some rather curious broken rules that called for an almost instant errata release. da gots not only new rules, but unlike pnp rules that can be changed with a released pdf, change game engine is tougher... which is probably another reason to keeps simple. hopefully game is enjoyable 'nuff that they gets opportunity to fine-tune... 'cause initial release is gonna be kinda the first opportunity to beta test rules & game engine with large scale genuine playing. HA! Good Fun!

They can call them "gambits" instead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy_XII#Battle_system is considerably after Gromnir first suggested at Bio, but as long as is in game, Gromnir satisfied. independently inspired... even got the American football reference? well, such an approach makes sense, so is not too unrealistic that somebody would come up independent-like. anybody that has played ff xii can tell us how goodly/badly it works in that game? HA! Good Fun!

there ain't a dm on the planet that would ever allow you to re-roll for literally hundreds o' times. is no different than using infinite xp glitches or limitless gold exploits. am seeing the smiley in taks post... but am always baffled by the peoples who sees some distinction 'tween shadowkeeper and 4 hours o' re-rolling. only difference Gromnir can see is that 'stead o' playing bg2 for 4 hours, you mindless hit re-roll for 4 hours. ... maybe Gromnir is too rational, but this kinda imaginary difference 'tween shadowkeeper and a thousand rerolls smacks o' wacky self-delusion... or temporarey insanity. then again, if game is more fun for you 'cause o' the self-delusion, then game IS more fun. do whatever makes more fun. still seem wacky-nutty to Gromnir. HA! Good Fun!

pocket plane group gots all kinda mods... including h4x0rz kinda stuff... why re-roll when you can simply give appropriate stats to a character? 2 minutes v. hours? never understood the re-roll thing when so many mod programs is available. HA! Good Fun! quick check results: is something called gate keeper and shadow keeper mods. lets you quick and easy gives whatever stats, spells, equip, etc. to your bg or bg2 character. re-roll til get acceptable numbers, or simply cut to chase and build as desired? is some kooky people who seem to enjoy the re-roll process... but Gromnir thinks those people is broken in the head.

Funny you should mention that, because apparently, Dragon Age will have "plays". I believe Dr. Z brought it up during a video interview, which brought back some memories of a seemingly endless discussion of it years ago on the Bio forums. hmmm. thanks for the info. having been booted from bio we hadn't heard such news... so thanks. is one o' those ideas we (and others) repeated ad nauseum and only got very minor positive response from developers. am genuine surprised they decided to implement. 'specially since there only seemed to be a handful o' genuine boardies who were really in favor o' the idea. 'course now that Gromnir gots positive/negative reinforcement, am gonna be as relentless with obsidian... or not. will be very curious to see how the concept gots implemented. HA! Good Fun! ps if called plays suck, am gonna claim that we got idea from leferd.

obsidian hotkeys everything else, am not sure why we can't gets some menu/hotkey options for basic jnpc commands. even so, we once again put forth notion of called plays... 'cause no matter how smarty the jnpc ai, it is gonna seem stoopid eventually if their behavior not take other party member behavior into account. in absence o' some kinda effective group-think ai we suggests the "play": 1 command to makes multiple members take pre-determined & sychronized actions. adds whole new level o' tactical sophistication... 'special if it were a customizable feature. HA! Good Fun!

toee were a ridiculously busted game that almost laughably gets categorized as a rpg. nevertheless, with some minor quibbles regarding inexplicable rules implementation, Gromnir thoroughly enjoyed toee turn-based combat. is too bad that troika screwed everything else during and after development o' toee or we might have seen more such games with similar combat. the game industry is disappointingly (but understandably) unimaginative, and if toee had been a success we woulda' seen clones of it. nwn and the fallouts were prime examples o' how terrible bad party ai can be. if it gets to a point whereby you is more likely to be successful in combat soloing as 'posed to using party mates, then something is clearly wrong. ... am understanding that some persons do not like to micromanage, and sadly, 'cause o' seeming limitations o' engine, ai cannot be simply turned off for those who prefer micromanage. finding some happy medium is difficult, and quite possibly doomed. 3 general categories o' ai consternation for Gromnir seems to keeps showing up in games such as nwn2. 1) area effect spells as has been mentioned earlier, area effect spells seems to be a problem for ai. soz will start at low levels, so Gromnir will be able to simply avoid having our customized pcs choose stuff like web or fireball. there is enough alternatives to such spells that we not feel too bad 'bout skipping. even so, it is disappointing that such useful spells is often the bane of our own party. hopeful the non-customizable jnpcs will be available at low enough levels so that we can effective control their spell lists as well. regardless, it is somewhat disappointing that how 'bout an auto-pause function? if a party spellcaster is about to cast an area effect spell, have possible possible to set game to auto-pause so player can somehow disrupt or alter target area. if player uninterested in micromanage not wanna be bothered, then they simply not have to check that particular auto-pause function. ideally we would rather be able to tailor the list o' area effect spells that would initiate a pause, but broad and general is probably easier to implement. 2) idiotic use o' spells am recalling nwn2 and grobnar's repeated attempts to use charm and mind affecting spells on undead. huh? have some jnpc cast a fire related offensive spell at a fire elemental or repeatedly tries to put undead to sleep never fails to drive us nutty... or nuttier. dunno, but this kinda problem seems to be simply a matter o' lack o' developer diligence. would take considerable 'mount o' time on the part of developers to script reasonable spell use... time the developers feel is better spent on other features. we got no elegant solution to this particular gordian knot. 3) "what is he doing over there?" most o' our problems with jnpc ai is simply a matter o' their choice o' pathfinding or targets. pathfinding has always been a problem with crpgs. cannot recall a single party-based crpg that did not inspire pathfinding concerns. pathfinding issues is multiplied if Gromnir cannot micromanage and fix as soon as we see jnpc alpha taking the most circuitous route possible to reach a target... managing to set off traps along the way, as well as attracting new opponents to the current battle. other than the weird pathfinding stuff is the suicide charge problems. melee jnpcs do not pick targets in a reasonable manner. our party breaks down into a charlie fox scenario far too quickly for our tastes. ... the reason why Gromnir has suggested the notion o' "plays" analogous to called plays in sports, is 'cause ai of particular party members, even if it seems logical to programmer, fails to recognize that the party member character is part o' a group. the behavior of 4 different characters with completely reasonable ai will eventually becomes baffling to a player 'cause o' fact that such ai ignores the fact that in a party-based game, teamwork is necessary. need a Group ai to really be effective. *shrug* realizing that party members with individual ai scripts is always gonna eventually do stuff counter to benefit o' the party, Gromnir would likes to see a more streamlined and simple manner to gets jnpcs to move to point A or point B, or to attack target A or Target B. got all kinda hotkeys for spells n' such, but we would get more use out o' a hotkey menu for directing jnpcs. haven't paid too much attention to this thread, so don't know if we is repeating suggestions already made. if so, ignore or accept as additional support. HA! Good Fun!

friendly fire is a pain in the arse... and there is no question that general party ai is stoopid. no matter what mod we has seen utilized, party is still stoopid. everybody plays different, so your "stoopid" is gonna be different than Gromnir's "stoopid." might be possible to makes a script that works well for kiss, but is unlikely it would be working well for Gromnir. most o' the friendly fire issues... weren't. am recalling that could turn off jnpc use of area effect spells. problem solved for most part... though we did run into this recurring problem in nwn2 and motb that had jnpcs turn hostile on each other if caught in an area of spell effect... even if spell were beneficial. *chuckle* paladin from nwn2 and cleric from motb were the most likely to go berserk... so maybe it were a 'haha' by developers commenting on religious types... or not. Gromnir prefers full micro-manage. that ain't gonna happen in soz, so am hopeful that we have some small menu o' easily accessed, basic, and useful commands that allows us to override ai... commands that actually work and genuine is useful in combat situations. HA! Good Fun!

am s'posing you thinks we read your post. not gonna happen. too much silliness. too much reply/quote. and mods asked for an end. "A distant relative of Yuan-ti allright. Not a fan of lizard men, but gnomes? I'll happily buy and use a scroll of gnomicide... Little pests. Why couldn't that suit of evil armour in BG2 be made out of Jan Jansens skin? bat.gif " am not quite sure what is so attractive 'bout the evil lizard/serpent person bit that it gets reused over and over in virtual all kinda media. bioware took their stab with nwn. obsidian has a done a few times. can't we have fluffy-bunny people... but evil? hmm. guess that has been done too. "night of the lepus" or somesuch. as for gnomes... now that 4e has made 'em monsters instead o' a playable race, you can kill 'em for their 10075 w/o remorse. HA! Good Fun!

I thought we just learnt that it will have a sucky end boss battle?!? But yeah, looks like that discussion has come full circle. Time to change the subject, please gentlemen? ... Besides, I hate the very concept of "boss fights". what if it were a boss battle fight with sleestaks and gnomes? maybe a gnome-sleestak ubg? HA! Good Fun!

am gonna assume you ain't being willful obtuse. "sorry, but you is the guy missing the point. akachi were the final obstacle/villain/antagonist... and it were nothing but an afterthought. you seem to be getting hung up on the label. by the very nature o' this being a game, there is gonna be a final conflict that involves combat, and if you ain't emotionally invested, your victory will be hollow. call villain or antagonist or obstacle not matter." "there were a final battle in motb. is not ideal for storytelling, but is part of the crpg formula... we get that. you fights a big bad at the end. call it villain or antagonist or whatever... if such an entity is going to be the ultimate obstacle in the game/story, you better make player care." "if the ultimate battle feels like an afterthought or simply a final exercise that must be endured rather than enjoyed, then writers did not effective build up the ultimate bad guy/obstacle... and no, an ultimate bad guy is not necessarily a bad guy. sympathetic villains and their like populate literature with some frequency. nevertheless, there will be an ultimate conflict, and the ultimate conflict better be something the player feels connected to... failure to make that connection is why obsidian ubgs keeps failing, and why their Climax almost invariably feels anti-climactic." rinse and repeat... so how many times did Gromnir clarify that end conflict not have to be a villain per se? "Yes, obviously, if there is a BIG BOSS BATTLE, it will be a climax. The actual combat with the Faceless Man and that entire scenario could have been done better. I've never denied that. But I think there's a pretty strong consensus that Akachi was a pretty interesting character. And I never said that some people didn't find him interesting, just that people who thought that were in a minority. There are a lot of other things that seem more prominent among players' complaints, including their disappointment in not getting to face off against Kelemvor. To each his own. But this all started because you went on a rant that every game needs an awesome villain, which I have disputed." am not even sure where to start... 'cause you clearly got yourself all tied in knots. am gonna disagree that there is a "strong consensus " that the climax, involving the ultimate confrontation with the akachi shadow thing, were fulfilling. in the abstract akachi may have been intriguing, but that not matter if player don't actually care. cernd, a bg2 npc, were intriguing, but the way his quest played out, and the crappy addition he made to party meant that Nobody gave a damn. the motb final conflict were, as with most obsidian games, anti-climactic... and consensus we see at the bio boards were that the climax of motb were maybe better than nwn2, but still unfullfilling. as Gromnir has stated 'bout a dozen times now, obsidian has a problem with their game climax. and, as it is very apparent that the climax o' the next expansion will follow same boss battle climax format as every previous obsidian game, they better find a way to get players emotionally involved with the central figures o' that climax. "Now you suddenly claim you agreed with me all along that it's not necessarily important to have a huge important battle with a huge important supervillain, but nowhere do I see your acknowledgement of my repeated claims to that effect." nope. you has simply not been paying attention. heck. at this point Gromnir ain't really sure what your point is as you ain't making one other than reply/quoting everything. Gromnir keeps trying to summarize and re-explain, but you go off on a different tangent each and every time. "I don't deny that there were probably a lot of people who didn't like The Transcendent One, but would you say they are in the majority? Regardless, I'll simply say that I don't agree with them." great. you don't have to agree. if a majority of people who played didn't care enough to get to end or didn't care 'bout transcendent one after finished, then that is revealing that transcendent one were a weak addition to the cast. for all ps:t strengths, the transcendent one, and more importantly, the final conflict at climax o' the game with the transcendent one, were not strengths commented on by players. HA! Good Fun! ps have never heard halo as being described as truly story driven. just as diablo had narrative, it were not really story driven.

Again, as you have done so many times over the years when I express gaming preferences with which you disagree, you drag out discussions from 9-10 years ago, talk about me as if I'm the deaf little pet sitting in the corner of the room, and proceed to explain to the forum why everything I think and say should effectively be dismissed. This time I wasn't in the mood to smile and take it. I've never been discourteous to you, Gromnir. Just the opposite. I am not "too sensitive". I'm pissed off by your rudeness and deliberate effort to dismiss me and my opinions as unimportant. I don't deserve this, not from you. okie dokie. clearly you saw something in our post that we didn't put into it. lord knows we didn't tell anybody to ignore you. specifically we said that there were nothing wrong with your type o' gameplay... is no less valid than is mc's or Gromnir's. simply recognized that Balance & Challenge arguments are not going to budge you... and yeah, 10 years of posting on same subject has made that obvious to Gromnir and anybody else that were paying attention. didn't fabricate untruths and specifically said that your approach were valid, but you see as dismissive. fine. screw it. normally Gromnir would apologize and move on, but if you wanna handle this way, so be it.

"Returning to the idea that the PC is partly Akachi and Akachi is partly the PC, how did Akachi reflect anything about me the PC? "Not only was Akachi a spectacularly dull as a cipher, but he was spectacularly dull as a mirror too. " is disturbing to have to agree with newc, but there it is. akachi were... dull. clearly akachi had parallels to the whole transcendent one shtick from ps:t, but akachi were even less compelling 'cause in spite of development o' story, it were all impersonal. as noted already, Gromnir couldn't think of name... kept referring to as "shadow fragment of self" and other such fuzzy descriptors. suggestion: abstract villains work okie dokie... if they remain abstract. sauron not seem so spooky if we find out that he gots halatosis and daddy issues. akachi were some kinda crappy quasi-abstract obstacle. myrkul were maybe the baddie, but got rid of him at 2/3 mark... so then what we got left? as noted already by numerous folks, akachi weren't really a villain, but he were the guy you battle at the Climax of game and Climax o' story. as such, developers should make so that player gives a damn. Gromnir didn't, and neither did many others. had nothing to do with game engines or obsidian stretching boundaries o' the crpg genre. obsidian folks simply did not create requisite emotional involvement. is bad writing... so do better. HA! Good Fun!

"You keep saying that every game needs to end in combat." actually, we has said the opposite a few times now, but if you cannot even get that far... is getting pointless if you cannot get that much. Gromnir has noted that every CRPG that has combat in game will end with potential for a boss battle. Gromnir has noted that nwn2 exp 2 will almost definitely have such a battle. you yourself seem stuck on ps:t, but even so, that leaves a whole stack o' games by obsidian with unfulfilling CLIMAXES ( final boss battle will be the climax, whether obsidian likes or not... 'cause you not seems to get that there is a connection 'tween two... which seems to maybe be a problem obsidian gots as well.) so the issue is how will obsidian improve climax of nwn2 exp 2? you seems to thinks that motb had a great climax, but clearly that ain't a unanimous pov as can be seen simply from this thread. if you claims you ain't never seen disgruntled fan postings 'bout motb ending as you seem to have missed similar concerns 'bout ps:t, then we is at an impasse... *shrug* "And, again, I've never heard substantial criticism about the ending of Torment," then you didn't pay attention to ip boards after ps:t were released. people who talk 'bout ps:t today, so many years removed from release, are generally the fans. the people who disliked or dismissed ps:t, stopped discussing the game a long time ago. nevertheless, as sales were pretty sucky, it should be obvious to even the most diehard ps:t fan, that there were many people who didn't like ps:t. bugginess. crap combat. unlikable protagonist. game started to suck after curst. no elves or dwarves. etc. were all kinds o' reasons given why people disliked ps:t. anti-climactic climax and general suckiness of fortress of regrets were not infrequent complaints. your lack o' perspective is not Gromnir's fault. "Now you're just deflecting. Sure I expect a boss battle. And it will be much better if we are connected to the conflict. And it is indeed the conflict itself which we need to be connected to much more than we need to be connected to the villain." Gromnir is deflecting? *chuckle* you completely derailed and has lost sight o' thread. original complaint were that obsidian ubg of past few games has been pretty forgettable. noted multiple times that a ubg = final obstacle, and not necessarily need be a bad guy. Gromnir then pointed out that if obsidian cannot get players/audience to feel emotionally involved in Climax, then climax will feel hollow. you has simply been reply/quoting self into insensibility since then. finally has got you almost back to square one where you recognize that nwn2 exp 2 will have, as all previous obsidian/bis games, a boss battle that is integral to Climax. all your nonsense 'bout games not needing such a climactic battle is therefore, pointless in the present context. ... am giving up... is just too much work keeping this on-track. HA! Good Fun!

*chuckle* our lack o' playing shooter games somehow is now worthy o' criticism? wow , getting desperate. never have heard splinter cell or halo lauded for great story and writing... is lots o' meaningful dialogue in those games? perhaps you got some hidden point. play fable and bioshock and assassin's creed... pretty much every crpg and loads o' rts games... account for virtually nothing... since your shooters is "virtually everything." okie dokie. your reply/quote is again what confuses you... lose track o' the argument. is not "every game" having to end with an epic battle with boss battle and closure. your points not work with story driven crpgs so maybe you try to prove point with computer chess? madden football and pong and shooters is not the same as is story driven crpgs. is diablo a story driven game? hardly, but it has a satisfying climax. if there ain't no meaningful multitude o' plot threads leading to climax, then it not take much to tie up, now does it? this is all basic stuff though, and am not seeing why is so difficult to grasp. for chrissakes, even the obsidian developers gets this much. more than one has mentioned/acknowledged, that you can't have a game w/o engaging gameplay. you can has a game w/o story. nevertheless, if you is gonna make story-driven... *sigh* repeat again: "1 more time, (and hopeful 'fore you resort to reply/quote stuff again) obsidian ain't never once altered the conventions o' crpg with some grand new approach. just as every other crpg in existence, the obsidians has games with a Climax that is centered 'round a final boss battle. however, through ineptitude or ignorance, they fails to make so that story climaxes proportionally and contemporaneous with boss battle... resulting in a hollow experience. is poor design. obsidian approach ain't groundbreaking... is simply busted." obsidian follows the formula. you talking 'bout how obsidian not have to follow formula is meaningless as to whether obsidian has been successful in past. kotor2. nnw2. motb. and even ps:t has all been criticized 'cause endings were anti-climactic. otherwise good games diminshed by bad understanding o' writing structure... or simple incompetence. other bis/obsidain games? iwd2 doesn't get lauded as a good game, so can't use as an example, but it too failed to have a satisfying climax. how were a bust in every way, so bad end is hardly noteworthy. only game left is iwd? in any event, you wanna change the way in which a stroy driven crpg is made, then be our guest, but we bet that the next nwn2 expansion is gonna climax with a boss battle. wanna bet on that? no? 'course not. there WILL be a climactic battle in the expansion, and only real question remains is if obsidian will somehow makes audience/player feels emotionally involved in that climax... unlike virtual all of their previous games. try not to keep confusing self with reply/quote. HA! Good Fun!

"You are missing the point entirely. I'm not saying that Akachi was a memorable villain. He wasn't even a villain. And I would never expect The Transcendent One to be on a list of best game villains, but I would expect Torment to be on a list of best game endings or best writing." sorry, but you is the guy missing the point. akachi were the final obstacle/villain/antagonist... and it were nothing but an afterthought. you seem to be getting hung up on the label. by the very nature o' this being a game, there is gonna be a final conflict that involves combat, and if you ain't emotionally invested, your victory will be hollow. call villain or antagonist or obstacle not matter. and Gromnir already admitted that ps:t had great writing... but it also had terrible witting. you realize that a game can have both good and bad writing, right? even nwn had some fantastic stuff. charwood were pretty great writing and had intriguing characters, but game overall... were bland. ps:t, up until curst, is a great game. after that... sorry, bu the ending were hardly great, and the transcendent one were a weak antagonist. and your point 'bout me is further delusional. some... no, Many people did play me simply for combat and 1007. wanna see shephard get more powerful and get better 1007... better armour and weapons and such. once the well runs dry, many folks lose interest. diablo series were little more than 1007 and boss battles with virtually 0 story... but it were the game that resurrected the crpg, and it is probable the most popular crpg franchise. you is kidding self. terrible video game cliches? HA! is not necessarily video game cliches we is talking 'bout. sure, ''cause these IS games there is certain conventions that will be adhered to, but is not just 'bout crpg limitations. is simply bad writing on the part of the obsidian folks. gots background and introductions... followed by rise of conflict... then climax... and a return to normalcy. at most basic level you gots all of the above in any adventure story and 99% of movies and books. problem is that obsidian not seem to be able to keeps folks emotionally invested in the climax... which is BAD writing. btw, any halo reference is gonna be lost on Gromnir as we never played... am not a button masher... thanks very much. 1 more time, (and hopeful 'fore you resort to reply/quote stuff again) obsidian ain't never once altered the conventions o' crpg with some grand new approach. just as every other crpg in existence, the obsidians has games with a Climax that is centered 'round a final boss battle. however, through ineptitude or ignorance, they fails to make so that story climaxes proportionally and contemporaneous with boss battle... resulting in a hollow experience. is poor design. obsidian approach ain't groundbreaking... is simply busted. HA! Good Fun!

"low levels" is just level 1? second level the combat gap increases, and am not sure why assume a 14 for dex, but if that is so then the rogue is gonna have at least a 16... so you is back to lagging behind again. also with worst hps in game, you is spending most of your time hiding, 'cause a couple o' hits from a kobold (or one critical) and you is dead. 'course this is stuff that even josh has explained on these boards, and if you not believe him, you sure as heck ain't gonna believe Gromnir. HA! Good Fun!

you say that we is in minority on issues... but show us any of those ubiquitous crpg polls/ lists that rank bestest crpg villains or best final battle. ever see transcendent one or akachi make list? nope. as much as people liked ps:t, transcendent weren't a particularly memorable or liked villain, and akachi... not even makes for fodder on subject. "God forbid game designers try to transcend the platform and try to provide quality entertainment." well, they failed multiple times in the attempt. obsidian/bis has had problems with endings. you are clearly in the minority if you disagree. kptpr2 and nwn2 and even ps:t had complaints 'bout ambiguous or unfullfilling conclusions... and one main reason why is 'cause o' lack o' emotional investment in overcoming the ultimate obstacle. sadly, 'cause these is games, there must be a final battle. whether you realize or not, many people play crpgs simply for the 1007 cycle and the combat. story is often an afterthought. obsidian ain't gonna be so foolish as to complete exclude a large % of their target audience. transcend the platform? right. obsidian is making entertainment. that entertainment might reach level o' art, but they ain't gonna transcend nothing... not if it costs 'em sales. there will always be a final battle, and as we said already, it not have to be some snidely whiplash villain, but you better make folks Care 'bout the conflict. HA! Good Fun!

am thinking that Di were a bit too sensitive 'bout this. weren't really trying to be mean, but you has been pretty upfront in past 'bout how you will hike back to town to get every farthing and shilling from sale o' dropped items o' 1007... and you re-rolled quite a bit in the ie games. you hated that the developers "fixed" ranged weapons after bg1 and these is just a handful o' examples. as we has said dozens o' times in past, we don't get Di's pov, but your way o' playing is hardly inferior. if you enjoy playing as you do, and you get money's worth from games, then good for you. even so, you IS a munchkin in every sense o' the word, and you does try to maximize 1007 cycle. it not make you a bad person, and is not wrong that you enjoy playing as you do... but for folks to try and convince you o' the error o' your ways with a balance or challenge argument is doomed from start. whatever. HA! Good Fun!

"Are you telling me that they didn't do an excellent job in telling the story of Akachi, and the curse, and motivating you to free your soul, put Akachi to rest, and end the curse?" yes. until you mentioned "akachi" Gromnir couldn't 'member name. that alone is proof that we weren't really engaged by story. there were a final battle in motb. is not ideal for storytelling, but is part of the crpg formula... we get that. you fights a big bad at the end. call it villain or antagonist or whatever... if such an entity is going to be the ultimate obstacle in the game/story, you better make player care. the final battle with "Was The Transcendent One a big bad guy that you were supposed to get satisfaction out of killing in Torment?" no. that is one reason why it were a terrible villain. "As much as anyone may dislike Torment for whatever reason, can anyone say that it's poorly written?" YES. some parts o' torment were horribly written. sure, ravel were a fantastic character, but she were hardly representative of all. the tirias portion o' game were less than inspired storytelling, and virtually everything that happened in fortress o' regrets needed a serious do-over from writers. torment, as expected from a game cobbled together by a handful o' different writers also trying to makes a compelling game, were hit & miss. hit more often than miss, and thankfully the setting afforded chrisA to wallow in his typical self-indulgent navel gazing (such stuff seemed almost silly in kotor2, but worked in ps:t well enough,) but ps:t gives as many examples o' bad writing as it does of goodly writing. look, like it or not, you is gonna have ultimate battles in crpgs... 'cause they is games. if the ultimate battle feels like an afterthought or simply a final exercise that must be endured rather than enjoyed, then writers did not effective build up the ultimate bad guy/obstacle... and no, an ultimate bad guy is not necessarily a bad guy. sympathetic villains and their like populate literature with some frequency. nevertheless, there will be an ultimate conflict, and the ultimate conflict better be something the player feels connected to... failure to make that connection is why obsidian ubgs keeps failing, and why their Climax almost invariably feels anti-climactic. HA! Good Fun!

So, what you're really saying is that you prefer unlimited power so combat doesn't interrupt the next soppy romance / plot / cookie cutter NPC chatter cutscene? Di is, for better or worse, an unabashed 1007 greedy munchkin of the first water. she were one o' those re-roll fanatics with the infinity engine games... trying to get an Uber-Di character. she bemoaned the fact that bioware and bis nerfed ranged weapons following bg1, and she has admitted that the will take a dozen trips to town to sell of dropped armour n' such... to maximize her ph47 10075. doesn't make her a bad person or nothing, but Di is pretty much immune to any "balance" or "challenge" argument. HA! Good Fun!